NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION, ET AL, AN UNNECESSARY SPARE PART IN CHANGE OF NAME: UNTANGLING THE CONUNDRUM, LAW AND PROCEDURE IN CHANGE OF NAME

NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION, ET AL, AN UNNECESSARY SPARE PART IN CHANGE OF NAME: UNTANGLING THE CONUNDRUM, LAW AND PROCEDURE IN CHANGE OF NAME

By ~ Meti M. Ukpeh, Esq. 

          [Ama-Mme Anana-Owo] 

ABSTRACT:

Verily, it is not a discombobulation, but a sigh of relief, a breath of fresh air, solace and succour that the law, through the judgment of the apex court in the land, has given the perspective and procedure for change of name a facelift. It is a truism that human biosphere recognizes a name as the most cherished identity; hence the law upholds and protects the sanctity of name. Against the hitherto stringent procedures for change of name, the law continues to prescribe and ameliorate the procedure for change of name hitherto obtainable in Nigeria. Hence, one may wish, so long as the wish or intention is legal, to change his/her name for diverse reasons--this could be as a result of marriage, divorce, adoption, extinction of name, professional reasons, among others. These seamless measures toward change of name and the requirements thereof will be X-rayed in this work

INTRODUCTION: a cursory look at change of name in the light of earlier position, the new position with law and procedure, a sample of deed poll and essential contents, and of course, recommendations will be discussed hereunder:

EARLIER POSITION

In soothe, change of name in Nigeria involves a legal process undertaken by an eligible Nigerian-- a child and adult Nigerian (18years and above) can change name(s) save, in the case of the child, it must be validly done by the parents, guardian ad litem or person(s) in loco perentis of the minor. 

A quick flashback on the past reveals that the deponent or maker has to swear an affidavit stating the intention to change or correct his name. An affidavit simply put, is a written statement of fact that is signed under an oath in presence of an official recognised authority such as a Notary Public, Justice of the Peace, or Commissioner for Oaths, etc.

Once this was done, the maker of the affidavit would publish the notice of change of name in a national newspaper. This was to ensure that the general public becomes aware of the change in name and subsequent correspondence or interaction would reflect the new name.

Consequently, before applying for a change of name in Nigeria, one must have kept below-listed documents handy, attached along submitting one's application for the change of name:

A signed court affidavit showing the change of name. It should not be more than one year old.

The newspaper cutting advertisement reflecting the maker's publicizing the change of name. This also should be less than one year from the date of advert.

A requirement to submit the declaration/advertisement of change of name

Two passport sized photographs displaying one's recent image.

Demand draft for the fees for publishing, and extra copies if required.

A letter of attestation from a recognized person

A public announcement of the change if required 

A statutory declaration (Affidavit)

A requirement of personal information which is place of birth and date, marital status and details of one's current residence, among others. 

THE NEW POSITION: LAW AND PROCEDURE

Nonetheless, the jurisprudential U-turn from the earlier position on change of name is boldly and well engraved in the recent case of PDP & Ors v Degi- Eremienyo & Ors (2020) LPELR-49734(SC), wherein the Supreme Court reaffirmed the decision of the Federal High Court Judge, I.E Ekwo who held that “the affidavit of correction and confirmation of name does not in his opinion, conform to the proper manner of changing a name or correcting a name on a certificate and that it is only by deed poll, and not by mere deposition that a name on an official certificate can be effected and further that the procedure necessarily affects official record and archives of the nation. That is after the deed poll that the deponent approaches the Nigerian Civil Registry to have the change published in the official gazette. None of these procedures had been done by the 1st respondent.”

Consequently, the law is, one cannot change or correct one’s name by swearing an affidavit and publishing change of name in a newspaper. One can only change or correct one's name by a Deed poll, and then proceed to the Nigerian Civil Registry to have it published in an official gazette. This principle held by the federal high court was accepted by the Supreme Court:

In PDP & ORS v. DEGI-EREMIENYO & ORS (2020) LPELR-49734(SC), the Supreme Court in considering the Instances in which the information given by a candidate (election matter) in an affidavit document and/or Form CF001 will be held to be false, effect of same, has this to say: 

"The trial Court correctly found at page 554 that "the entire proceedings here in my opinion is based on documentary evidence". The finding of fact was neither challenged at the lower Court nor disturbed by it. The appellants, as the plaintiffs, merely asked the trial Court in their originating summons to interpret the documentary evidence vis-a-vis the claim of the 1st respondent that the various names on those documents did not belong to him and that he had no nexus with them as he had falsely claimed in his Form CF001. The respondents, as defendants, particularly the 2nd and 3rd respondents did not dispute those documents. They in fact admitted that the documents belong to the 1st respondent and that he owned those multiple names appearing variously on the said documents. The facts, not being in hostile conflict, are the basis for the proceedings in the originating summons. The lower Court erred when it found that the facts on which the originating summons rested and was premised on were in conflict. They were not. The trial Court found correctly that the facts were not contentious and that it was merely tailed upon to decide from the non-contentious facts whether the 1st respondent had falsely laid claims to those exhibited documents and the various names appearing therein. Now, on the affidavit evidence: did the appellants, as plaintiffs, not establish their case founded on Section 31(5) of the Electoral Act to warrant the trial Court invoking the sanction provided in subsection (5) of Section 31 of the Electoral Act? They did, as the trial Court correctly found at pages 574 - 577 of the record. The 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents, as appellants at the lower Court, did not challenge the holding of the trial Court that it is only the authorities that issued the First School Leaving Certificate issued in 1976, and the West African Examination Council that issued GCE certificate in 1984 that can effectively change the names appearing thereon, and that no affidavit of correction or regularization can effectively change the names thereon. The trial Court also correctly stated the procedure for regularization and correction. Its statement at pages 575 and 576 "that affidavit of change, correction and confirmation of name has to be by deed poll and not mere deposition" is adverse to the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents. This specific point in the decision of the trial Court was not challenged. It subsists and remains binding on the parties. Even when on this reasoning the trial Court found at pages 574 and 575 that the attempted change of name or regularization by affidavit of correction and confirmation of name was futile and fraudulent, and that the 1st respondent could not claim to be the person referred to therein; the 1st and 2nd respondents in their joint notice of appeal at the lower Court, in grounds 9 and 11 therein, merely complained that the decision of the trial judge was laced with conjecture, or "grounded in speculation and conjecture" and that there is no evidence that the 1st respondent was not the holder of the certificate attached to his Form CF001. The lower Court, perversely, seemed to agree with the preposterous stance. At page 132 is the statutory declaration of age deposed to by one Henry Vanman, an uncle of the 1st respondent, it was claimed therein that the name of 1st respondent; as at 31 July 1990 was Biobarakuma Degi. However, in the purported affidavit of regularisation of name deposed by the 1st respondent on 18 September 2018, before a faceless notary public, the 1st respondent averred that "my name at birth is Biobarakuma Wangagha Degi". His uncle in 1990 gave his name as Biobarakuma Degi in the statutory declaration of age. The 1st respondent also claimed in the said affidavit of regularisation of name that "while registering for my West African School Certificate Examinations the alphabet 'A' was inadvertently added to my surname to read thus: Biobarakuma Wanagagha Adegi and same was captured in the certificate I obtained therefrom". He lied on this. The WAEC General Certificate of Education at page 61, bears Adegi Biobakuma and not Biobarakuma Wanagagha Adegi. ?The 1st respondent did not explain why in 1990, inspite of the alleged error in 1984, Rivers State University of Science and Technology still inscribed the name: "Degi, Biobarakuma" on the Certificate at page 62 and not Biobarakuma Wanagagha Degi, his name at birth or Biobarakuma Degi appearing on his 1990 statutory declaration of age. It is clearly fraudulent for one person to allegedly bear several names that he uses variously, chameleonically to suit the changing environment. Clearly, the lower Court erred when it held that the affidavit of correction and confirmation of name sworn to by the 1st respondent on 9 August 2018 and the Chronicle Newspaper advertorial placed by the 1st respondent himself explained the discrepancies in all the information, certificates and documents. For instance, neither the said affidavit nor the advertorial explained the name Biobarakuma Degi on the statutory declaration of age. While Adegi on the WAEC/GCE certificate was said to be an error committed at the time of registering for examination leading to the issuance of the certificate; no word was uttered on the name Biobarakuma, instead of Biobarakuma, also appearing, on the same certificate. The First School Leaving Certificate issued in 1976 at page 129, has the surname Degi and the first name Biobaragha which is not a synonym of Biobakuma nor Wanagagha or Wangagha. ?On this note, I hereby resolve these issues against the respondents particularly the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents in favour of the appellants. Section 182(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), provides that no person shall be qualified for election to the office of governor of a state if he has presented a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission. The certificate used here is in small letters. It bears its ordinary natural meaning. It is here used a noun that derives from the verb: certify which means to - attest, testify, vouch, ascertain, verify. The word "forged" qualifies "certificate" in this provision. In my humble view, the word forged used here is in the context of fabricating, framing, falsifying, inventing a false attestation, vouching falsely. That was my stance in Angos Dide v. Seleketimibi (2009) LPELR - 4038 (CA) that is almost on all fours with the instant case. In his Form CF001, the 1st respondent on oath, vouches in paragraph F thereof - I hereby declare that all the answers, facts and particulars I have given in this Form are true and correct and I have to the best of my knowledge fulfilled all the requirements for qualification for the office I am seeking to be elected. This clearly is a certificate of the truth of the facts and particulars given by the 1st respondent in the said Form CF001. If any fact vouched to be true turns out to be false, particularly deliberately false, then in my view the 1st respondent has presented to INEC a forged or false certificate: Dide v. Seleketimibi. Section 31(5) of the Electoral Act complements Section 182(1) (j) of the Constitution. It empowers any person who has reasonable grounds to believe that any information given by a candidate (like the 1st respondent in the affidavit i.e (Form CF001) submitted by that candidate is false to file a suit at the Federal High Court, High Court of a State or FCT against such person seeking a declaration that the information contained in the affidavit is false. The sanction for presenting to INEC Form CF001 containing false facts about the personal particulars or information of the candidate, by virtue of Section 31 (6) of the Electoral Act, is an order issued by the High Court, disqualifying such candidate from contesting the election. The lower Court was wrong in holding that the appellants did not establish that the 1st respondent's Form CF001 presented to INEC contained materially false facts and information or personal particular of the 1st respondent. The trial Court on the contrary was right. On this issue, I also allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of the lower Court delivered on 23 December 2019 and do hereby reinstate the judgment of the trial Court delivered on 12 November 2019 including all the orders made therein. The sum total is that the joint ticket of the 1st and 2nd respondents sponsored by the 1st respondent was vitiated by the disqualification of the 1st respondent. Both candidates disqualified are deemed not to be candidates at the governorship election conducted in Bayelsa State. It is hereby ordered that INEC, (the 4th respondent herein) declare as winner of the governorship election in Bayelsa State, the candidate with the highest number of lawful votes cast with the requisite constitutional (or geographical) spread. The 4th respondent (INEC) is hereby further ordered to forthwith withdraw the certificate of return issued to the 1st and 2nd respondents and issue certificate of return to the candidate who had the highest number of lawful votes cast in the governorship election and who also had the requisite constitutional (or geographical) spread." Per EJEMBI EKO, JSC (Pp 8 - 16 Paras D - D)

 In fact, in the case under review, the crux of the suit was not on the publication of the changed name, it was on the falsity of the names in which the 1st respondent claimed to have changed. In that case, the names the respondent bear at each stage of his life were fraught with lots of inconsistencies and falsity. Instances are:

•The name in his First School Leaving Certificate issued in 1976 Degi, Biobragha.

•His WAEC/GCE, 1984 bears the name Adegi Brokumo.

•His first degree bears the name- Degi Biobarakuma Wangawa.

•In his affidavit of correction and confirmation of name sworn to on 9 August 2018, he asserted that his correct name is Biobarakuma Degi.

•In another affidavit of regularisation of name sworn to on 18 September 2018, he averred that his correct name is Biobarakuma Wanagha Degi Eremienyo.

Based on this, the Supreme Court Justice, Ejembi Eko held that the respondent had told a lie and his inconsistencies portrayed a chameleon nature. The consequence of this is that the Court had to invoke section 31(6) of the Electoral Act to cancel the 1st respondent, and consequently the 2nd respondent’s victory in the Bayelsa governorship election and then made another candidate who came second in the governorship election, the governor of the state. This is irrespective that the 1st respondent, nominated as a deputy governor, was the one who gave fraudulent details, and not the 2nd respondent who was the Governor-elect.

As a fortiori, it has always been the law that a person’s name and initials must be constant and consistent as the rising and the setting of the sun. The Supreme Court reiterated this fact with more emphasis in the case of Titilayo Plastic Ind. Ltd v. Fagbola (2019) LPELR-SC.205/2004., where the Apex Court held that “the exact names used for professional purposes must be the same used in an official capacity or else render such documents defective and not a mere misnomer.”

Thus, to put succinctly and graphically, the procedure include:

1) The maker must execute a Deed Poll

Below is a sample with necessary modification:

CHANGE OF NAME

THIS DEED OF CHANGE OF NAME is made this----------day of ---------2022

 By Emem Akpan, Female, Christian and Nigerian Citizen of No.4, Idoro road, Uyo, Akwa Ibom State hereinafter called the MAKER 

THIS DEED RECITES S FOLLOWS:

1. Mrs. Emem  Edet Akpan (nee: Emem Anthony Otu) is my new name

2. I got married to Mr. Edet Akpan Udo in Akpakpan Village in Essien Udim Local Government Area of Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria.

3. While the traditional marriage was contracted on 18/4/2015, the statutory marriage was contracted on 26/4/2015.

4. Members of both families were present at the marriage celebrations and freely gave their consents and blessings to the union.

5. That, former Miss Emem Edet Akpan shall be known, called and addressed as Mrs. Emem Edet Akpan to reflect my marriage status.

6. That I wholly renounce and relinquish my former name, but assume henceforth, the name Mrs. Emem Edet Akpan so that I may hereafter be called, known and distinguished by this assumed name.

THIS DEED WITNESSES AS FOLLOWS:

 In pursuance of this deed, I HEREBY declare and confirm the change of name of Mrs. Emem  Edet Akpan (nee: Emem Anthony Otu), and the general public is on notice that all documents bearing the former name remain valid.

IN WITNESS OF WHICH THE MAKER HAS EXECUTED THIS DEED IN THE MANNER BELOW THE DAY AND YEAR FIRST ABOVE WRITTEN.

SIGNED AND SEALED

By the within named MAKER ---------------------------------

IN THE PRESENCE OF

1) Name:

Address:

Occupation:

Signature:

2) Name:

Address:

Occupation:

Signature:

Franked By:

METI M. UKPEH, ESQ.

Legal Practitioner

Ekwere, Ekwere & Asso.

(Fortress and Shepherds)

N0. 63, UDOTUNG UBO STREET,

UYO. AKWA IBOM STATE.

081-640-132-30

Metiukpeh8899@gmail.com

2) One must apply to the documentation Department of Publication, Civil registry, requesting them to print one's new name in Nigeria’s official gazette. In Akwa Ibom state, this is made to the Ministry of Information, State Secretariat (Idongesit Nkanga Secretariat), Uyo LGA. This application normally attracts a fee of N5000 (Five Thousand Naira) or may be higher depending on the state. When the name is reflected in the gazette, print a copy of the page showing one's changed name and apply for new government documents that exhibit the new name. 

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

It is very apt submitting firmly that, from the foregoing; two requirements suffice a valid change of name procedure, to wit: 1) Execution of a Deed Poll, and 2) Taking steps to register and publish same in the official gazette of the government of Nigeria. Consequently, the requirements of newspaper publication alongside others listed above in the earlier position on change of name, are unnecessary spare parts when juxtaposed with the new dawn and relief enunciated in the PDP & Ors.(supra). 

Thus the following recommendation is apt:

The Nigerian Civil Registry/National Population Commission (NPC) which has administrative offices in each locality of the country, should be well armed to handle the registration of the Deed Poll as allied duty, besides its usual duties (birth and death certifications) as change of name is incidental thereto. In Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, this office is located at Akpan Essien Lane. 

There is need for a synergy between the department of publication in the Ministry of Information and the NPC for a seamless registration, documentation and publication after a deed poll has been executed by the maker

With particular reference to Akwa Ibom State, the Attorney - General of the state, NBA, NPC and the Ministry of Information, among others, should synergize to create awareness for about six (6) million Akwa Ibomites on the intendment and expectation of the law on citizens regarding this new procedure for change of name.